MAWA Conference French experience in implementing …€¦ · French experience in implementing a...

MAWA Conference

French experience in implementing a

military airworthiness regulation

Warsaw, July 2011

Direction de la Sécurité Aéronautique d’État 2 MAWA Conference Warsaw 06.07.2011

The international civil regulation

ICAO: shall be applicable to civil aircraft, and shall not be applicable to State

aircraft (Chapter I, art. 3 a) ;

aircraft used in military, customs and police services shall be deemed to be State aircraft (Chapter I, art. 3 b) ;

the contracting States undertake, when issuing regulation for their State aircraft, that they will have due regard for the safety of navigation of civil aircraft (Chapter I, art. 3 d).

Regulation (EC) n°1592/2002 creating EASA Art 1 : This Regulation shall not apply when products, parts, appliances,

personnel and organisations … are engaged in military, customs, police, or similar services. The Member States shall undertake to ensure that such services have due regard as far as practicable to the objectives of this Regulation

N.B. Current Regulation is (EC) n°216/2008 : Art 1.2 has not changed

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Prior situation

Airworthiness requirements were not mandatory in the technical

specifications of DGA contracts for aircraft procurement

JAR/FAR requirements sometimes specified for civil derivative aircraft :

JAR/FAR 25 for cargo aircraft

JAR/FAR 29 for helicopters (including Tiger and NH90)

Certification is explicitly part of qualification process

No equivalent available for fighter aircraft, even if practically done

Specification of various norms (AIR, Stanags…)

Specification of safety objectives

Safety of flight assessed during qualification process in particular during

flight tests by CEV (now DGA Flight testing)

Certification is implicitly part of qualification process

Aircraft maintenance has always been performed according to

the state of the art, but was not based on a formal airworthiness

regulation

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Why a regulation ?

Three accidents occurred in 2000/2001:

US C130 firefighter leased by Civil Safety service

Not considered as a State owned aircraft

Mirage F1 after engine stopped

Modification declared mandatory to restore airworthiness 15 years before but never

procured

CAP232 during an acceptance test flight by CEV

(now DGA Flight testing)

Civil registered but with invalid permit to fly

No particular higher crash rate,

but lawsuits more likely to happen

Need of an airworthiness regulation for legal protection

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


French regulation

France issued an airworthiness regulation for military and State

owned aircraft on 09 Dec 2006 under the Decree n°2006-1551

(signed by the Prime Minister) with 3 ministerial orders

Edicts rules for the use, the airworthiness and the registration of military

aircraft and state owned aircraft engaged in customs, police and similar

services

Defines three categories of military aircraft

1° State owned Aircraft used by the organisations concerned with the authority of

the Minister of Defence;

2° Aircraft not belonging to the State classified as armaments or military systems;

3° On joint decision of the Minister of Defence and the Minister in charge for the

civil aviation, aircraft not belonging to the State, but used to carry out missions

for the State and piloted by a crew under the authority of the Minister of

Defence.

Excludes from its scope the foreign military aircraft used by their armed

forces and flying in France

Designates also the head of DGA as the certification authority for the

State owned aircraft engaged in custom, police and similar services

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


The EASA regulation speaks of “competent authority”

Identify the competent authority for each domain

The original organisation was based on :

1 Technical Authority :

PtF, type certification, continued airworthiness of type design, DOA/POA,

registration for flight test aircraft

7 End Users (called Operating Authorities) :

CoA, continuing airworthiness of individual aircraft, registration of aircraft in

service, continuing airworthiness management /maintenance/training

organisation approvals and personnel licences

French State aviation organisation

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


French State aviation organisation

Possible conflicts of interest :

Technical Authority :

The head of DGA is both Technical Authority and responsible manager of

all armament programmes

The decision makers who have a delegation of authority from the head of

DGA are in separate directorates to guarantee sufficient independence

DGA instruction defining the level of airworthiness decisions that can be

signed by the officially appointed authorized signatories

End Users (called Operating Authorities) :

The End Users have both operating responsibility and oversight

responsibility

Need for splitting

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Creation of DSAE : State aviation authority

(Airworthiness directorate)

Technical

Authority

End Users

(incl. CAMO)

May grant exemption, by a justified decision and for a limited

period, with the requirements of the CoA in the event of

Exceptional circumstances or of urgent operational needs

Civil aviation

Current situation Prior situation

in 2006

Current situation

in 2011

Military aviation

Continuing

Airworthiness

Authorities

Operators

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Civil vs military : who does what ?

Technical Authority

Military stakeholders

Operators

EASA

Civil stakeholders Rulemaking and executive functions

• Establishes the essential

requirements

• Conduct Type certification

• Approve flight test conditions

• Ensure Continued airworthiness

• Approves Design organisations

National authorities

• Establish the rules for continuing airworthiness

Aviation Safety Authority

Technical Authority

End Users / CAMOs

• Issues permit to fly (flight tests)

• Registration of flight test aircraft

• Approves Production

organisations

• Appreciates the compliance of

new products to the type design

• Approves organisations (maintenance,

continuing airworthiness management, training)

• Issues maintenance personnel licences

• Issues Individual CoAs

• Registration of aircraft in service

Aviation Safety Authority

• Apply the rules

• Manages Continuing airworthiness

• Can grant exemptions for urgent

operational needs

European Commission

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Transitional provisions of the regulation

Transitional provisions in order not to ground fleets :

for the Technical Authority :

- The types of product in service before the publishing date of this ministerial

order or already qualified by the DGA are considered type certified.

- Within three years from the publishing date of this ministerial order, the

technical authority issues a Type Certificate for each type of product mentioned

in the previous subparagraph, with the associated Type design definition, and

designates a Type Certificate Holder (TCH).

for the End Users :

- Within five years from the publishing date of this ministerial order, the end

users issue, according to the corresponding Type Certificates, the certificates

of airworthiness:

1° to aircraft in service before the publishing date of this ministerial order and in

conformity, if necessary, with the decisions taken in the configuration

management board, maintained in accordance with the maintenance rules in

force and with the directives issued by the technical authority;

2° to aircraft, of which the contract of acquisition or rent was notified at the latest

on the publishing date of this ministerial order, in conformity with their qualified

definition.

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Late 2006 : Ambitious original schedule but limited scope

- TCs for all product types (legacy products included)

- CoAs for all aircraft in service after 2011

- Broad requirements for TCH organisations

- No requirements for maintenance organisations and personnel

Late 2009 Late 2011

Continued airworthiness of type design

CoAs

TCs

Late 2006

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Type certificates

Schedule for issuing TCs almost met

The Technical Authority has issued so far

67 aircraft TCs + 2 UAVs,

48 engine TCs,

22 propeller TCs,

24 STCs

No TC issued for fleets to be retired before 31.12.2014

Each TC is issued with :

a TCDS (Type Certificate Data Sheet)

for legacy products, an “Airworthiness Reference Data Sheet” listing :

the Technical Authority’s decisions related to continued airworthiness

the modifications decided by the Configuration Management Board and

considered as airworthiness mandatory (from a mutually agreed Board decision

rank up to TC issuance : modifications decided before this rank are supposed to

be implemented no need to sort out mandatory modifications)

The Airworthiness Reference Data Sheet is then to be updated by the End Users

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


FRA annexes

Instruction n°2009-16880/DEF/DGA/DET/CEP/ASA dated 16 Jan

2009 related to essential requirements with 4 annexes : • Annex 1 : essential requirements for the airworthiness of military aircraft and State

owned aircraft (based on OCCAR document adapted from annex I to EC regulation 216/2008)

• Annex 2 : a list of certification specifications and associated means of compliance

(mostly civil except for UAVs) recognized to meet the essential requirements

• Annex 3 : FRA 21 (based on Part 21 of EC regulation 1702/2003 + Subpart Z “Alternative

procedures” based on GM and AMC 21A14(B))

• Annex 4 : FRA forms (based on EASA forms) 1a, 52, 53, 25

Instruction n°017/DEF/IGA-Air/BSMN dated 30 Jul 2010

(based on EC regulation 2042/2003) related to continuing airworthiness,

organisation approvals and maintenance personnel licences

with 4 annexes : • Annex 1 : FRA M (based on Part M)

• Annex 2 : FRA 145 (based on Part 145)



Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


FRA scope vs EASA scope

DGA

DSAÉ

Decree + Order n°1 + Essential

Requirements (instr DGA annex 1)

Order n° 2 +

FRA 21 (instr DGA

annex 3)

+ Forms (instr DGA

annex 4)

list of certification

specifications & associated

means of compliance

(instr DGA annex 2)

FRA M

FRA 145

FRA 66

FRA 147

and associated AMC’s

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Other amendments and add on

Order n°2 was amended by the order dated December 17th,

2009 :

Notion of primary certification authority, civil or military

Possibility to recognise the certification process performed by a primary authority

Precision of DGA scope of work in that case

Instruction n°2010-84372/DEF/DGA/DT/ST/DGA_IP/ASA

dated 16 Mar 2010 defining the conditions of approval and application of:

- the airworthiness directives issued by…

- the supplemental type certificates issued by…

- the SB’s, repair solutions and some technical directives issued by the

manufacturers and approved by …

…a recognized civil primary authority to (civil) types certified aircraft used

by MoD, Customs, Public Safety and Civil Safety services

In case the OEM is not or is no longer the TCH, possibility to limit the

obligations of the actual TCH

ex : SIAé (State industrial maintenance organisation)

Modifications on conditions of PtF issuance for acceptance flights

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Issues : TC/STC

General provisions : The manufacturer applies for obtaining a TC/STC

Transitional provision : The Technical authority issues a TC/STC and designates a TCH

What if the manufacturer refuses to be the TCH Find another TCH (ex : SIAé for C160)

Contracting TCH support to assume the duties of continued

airworthiness Possible additional costs

Possible gaps between 2 subsequent contracts

GFE (Government furnished equipment) If within airworthiness scope, issue a TSO or a STC

Stores and mission equipment Define which are within airworthiness scope and which are not work in progress

Controlled environment additional costs

thus limit the scope strictly to airworthiness related stores and mission equipment

Incomplete documentation for some “exotic” legacy aircraft Difficulties to consolidate the airworthiness reference data sheet

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Issues : airworthiness reviews

Airworthiness reviews not well prepared by some CAMO units

because of lack of experience (CAMO units relying on airworthiness

reviews to address deviations) Requires airworthiness review complements to check corrective actions

Rely on transitional provisions in order not to ground aircraft with level 1 deviations

Original schedule based on the assumption that the next 2 extensions

of the airworthiness review certificates are issued by CAMO under

FRA M approval privilege : Very few CAMOs are FRA M approved Unexpected additional workload for the

Aviation Safety Authority to fill the gap unless introducing a new transitional provision :

maximum 3-year validity of the first airworthiness review certificates until FRA M

approval

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Issues : DOA/POA (FRA 21)

The Design and Production organisation approvals may be granted with

privileges. The possible privileges are defined in : Design : Subpart J FRA21A.263

“…is approved under the authority of design organisation approval (DOA) n° C.[xyz]-DGA ”

Approval of flight conditions except for initial flights

PtF issued by the Technical authority (≠ civil regulation)

Production : Subpart G FRA21A.163

Issue flight clearance, within the frame of a general PtF

Production without POA remains possible Subpart F

Civil organisation approvals may be recognized if the civil airworthiness

authority is recognized and if the scope is applicable

Audits although limited to OEMs with direct contracts means consistent and

skilled workforce to perform them

Approved modifications (in the airworthiness sense) still need to be accepted

by the Configuration Management Board before being implemented

Organisation approval does not replace Quality Assurance : it is just part of it

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Issues : Form 1

FRA form 1a : Authorized release certificate for parts and appliances

from production according to FRA 21 Subpart G

FRA form 1b : Authorized release certificate for parts and appliances

from maintenance organisations according to FRA 145

Possibility to merge FRA Form 1a and CoC (Certificate of Conformity)

to have a single certificate valid both for airworthiness and contract ?

Introduce transitional provisions to cope with the absence of POA

For civil certified aircraft types, EASA Form 1 is recognized for new

products but dispute with the company acting on behalf of the FR CAA for oversight about products

aimed for military aircraft not taken into account for fee calculation

for maintained parts and appliances, the use of EASA form 1 is forbidden by EASA

No FRA Form 1a for Supplier furnished spare equipment because there

is no direct contract with subcontractors

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Issues : MMEL/MEL

Aircraft with equipment unserviceable cannot be authorized to fly with

just the green light of the chief of operations

Records of such unauthorized configurations in the aircraft logbook

may lead to level 1 deviations during the airworthiness reviews

Introduce the civil principle of MMEL/MEL in the regulation MMEL : Master Minimum Equipment List

- Defined by the TCH and approved by the Technical Authority during the certification process

MEL : Minimum Equipment List

- Defined by the End User and approved by the Aviation Safety Authority (DSAE)

- Cannot be less restrictive than MMEL

Already used on civil type certified aircraft, but not addressed on specific military aircraft

like fighters

Mandatory for future aircraft types

Introduce also transitional provisions For legacy aircraft, in the absence of MMEL, define and validate an

Operating & Technical Tolerance List (OTTL) based on grandfather law

Until 31.12.2014, Airworthiness Review Certificates can still be issued and extended in

spite of the absence of MEL or OTTL

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Issues : organisation approvals and

maintenance personnel licences

FRA M approvals CAMO to be appropriately appointed

Responsibilities to be properly endorsed by the accountable manager

Incremental approval process by product types

The approved maintenance plan based on the recommended maintenance plan

issued by the TCH during certification does not exist for some legacy aircraft

Draft a maintenance plan for approval by the CAMO

FRA 145 approvals For state maintenance organisations, incremental approval process by product types

For private maintenance organisations, approval process to be programmed

according to award or renewal of MRO contracts

Obligation of the main contractor to oversee its subcontractors, which cannot have a

FRA 145 approval as they is no direct contract

Traceability of spare parts in stock : maintenance data often not approved or even

absent

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


Issues : organisation approvals and

maintenance personnel licences

FRA 66 licences : Grandfather law to issue FRA 66 licences to skilled maintenance personnel

difficulty to have a single grandfather law among the 7 End users

FRA 66 licences to be issued also for maintenance personnel of private FRA 145

maintenance organisations

Need to synchronize with FRA 145 approvals

Military turnover to be anticipated

FRA 147 approvals Incremental approval process by product types

No return of experience yet

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues


~ 1500 CoAs

~ 200 maintenance organisations to approve

~ 70 design or production organisations to approve

~ 5000 licensed maintenance personnel

CoAs

CAMO,

Training

organisations

State maintenance

organisations

Production(*)

Private maintenance

organisations

OK

New and more realistic implementation schedule

with updated or new transitional provisions

Controlled environment : Late 2016

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 FRA 21 G

2016

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

2011 2012 2013 2014

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

100% CoAs (Sustainable fleets)

Late 2014

100% FRA M, FRA 147

Late 2014

100% FRA 145 NSO

Mid-2015

100% FRA 145 NSI

2016

D

G

A

D

S

A

É

Regulation

Organisation

Implementation

Issues

(*) FRA 21 J Design : no real timeframe constraint as, in the absence of DOA,

any airworthiness approval is done by the Technical Authority


A 310

A330 AUG

A 340 TLRA

A400M

Alouette III

Alphajet

ATL2

C135 FR

CAP 10B

CASA 212

CASA 235

CL 415

Cougar

Dauphin

Dauphin Pedro

Dauphin SP

DHC 6

DRAC

E-2 C Hawkeye

E-3 F AWACS

EC 135

EC 145

EC 725

Ecureuil

Epsilon

Extra 300/330

F 406

F10 MER

Falcon Gardian

Falcon 50

Falcon 50 Surmar

Falcon 900

Falcon ARPEGE

Falcon 7X

Fennec

Gazelle

Hercules C130 H

Jodel D140

KC 135 R

Lynx

Mirage 2000 D

Mirage 2000 C

Mirage 2000 N

Mirage 2000-5

Mirage 2000 B

Mirage F1 CR

Mirage F1 CT

Mirage F1 B

Mystère 20

NH90

Panther

PC 7

PC 6

Gliders

Puma

Q 400

Rafale M

Rafale B

Rafale C

Rallye

SEM

SIDM Harfang

SDTI Sperwer

Super Puma

TBM 700

Tigre HAD

Tigre HAP

Transall C160

Transall Gabriel

Turbofirecat

Xingu

MAWA Conference French experience in implementing …€¦ · French experience in implementing a...

Documents

Transcript of MAWA Conference French experience in implementing …€¦ · French experience in implementing a...